Moron who sends Tom Daily offensive tweets gets arrested

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
No, we voted people into power to make these decision on our behalf. It's subjective.

You vote people into power to make your decisions for you. That isn't the same thing as having representatives carry out the public will. You don't have to think, someone will do it for you, be your Good Shepherd. You abdicate your right of self expression for the imagined security of filtered thought. Pardon me but that's your social Soma, the opiate of your masses.


Everyone has the right to exercise foolishness, but it's rarely advantageous to boast of it, which you do too often.
 

actuarial

Platinum Member
Jan 22, 2009
2,814
0
71
notice in this example i was stating a non-threatening opinion. i as not conveying a threat, the law cant touch me.

If you can truely say anything you want you don't need caveats.

Britain has more restrictions than the US, but the US is not free from restrictions on speech.
 

actuarial

Platinum Member
Jan 22, 2009
2,814
0
71
Hal, since you have "freedom of speech", I'm wondering - can you give some examples of things you're allowed to say that people in countries without freedom of speech are NOT allowed to say? Perhaps that would elaborate your point a little better.

How about "the government sucks"
 

HAL9000

Lifer
Oct 17, 2010
22,021
3
76
Hal, since you have "freedom of speech", I'm wondering - can you give some examples of things you're allowed to say that people in countries without freedom of speech are NOT allowed to say? Perhaps that would elaborate your point a little better.

Sure, they can't, criticise their governments, or post on twitter at all, they can't search for Tiananmen Square on google or protest against their nations foreign policies.

Etc.
 

HAL9000

Lifer
Oct 17, 2010
22,021
3
76
You vote people into power to make your decisions for you. That isn't the same thing as having representatives carry out the public will. You don't have to think, someone will do it for you, be your Good Shepherd. You abdicate your right of self expression for the imagined security of filtered thought. Pardon me but that's your social Soma, the opiate of your masses.


Everyone has the right to exercise foolishness, but it's rarely advantageous to boast of it, which you do too often.

Doing what's right isn't always doing what's popular. That's why we don't vote people into power to carry out public will.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Doing what's right isn't always doing what's popular. That's why we don't vote people into power to carry out public will.

Then make it even better. Since the public will isn't a consideration eliminate the threat and do away with elections. That makes sense because you don't want what's right threatened. You would be secure from those you fear, the people. Democracy, the greatest threat.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
Then make it even better. Since the public will isn't a consideration eliminate the threat and do away with elections. That makes sense because you don't want what's right threatened. You would be secure from those you fear, the people. Democracy, the greatest threat.

HAL's posts show just how quickly and easily you can brainwash people into thinking that they are more "free" when others make decisions for them and protect them from harmful thoughts or expression.